There are several different torso restraint/parachute harness arrangements currently being used in high performance military aircraft. In some of these arrangements, the harness is mounted to the ejection seat and is adjustable to any size crew member. In other arrangements, the harnesses are fitted to individual crew members and are considered personal equipment. Each of these two types of arrangements, adjustable or individually fitted, has advantages and disadvantages.
The United States Air Force and the United States Navy both use a type of individually fitted harness. The air Force harness is relatively simple but is not particularly comfortable when suspended from the parachute risers. The harness requires a separate lap belt for lower torso restraint. The lap belt is sometimes inadequate for preventing submarining under combined downward and forward g forces. "Submarining" occurs when the pelvis rotates and slips underneath the lap belt. The harness used by the Navy is integrated into a torso suit for easier donning and greater comfort. The harness eliminates the submarining problem by incorporating lap belt fittings which securely connect the harness to the seat. A major drawback of the Navy fitted harness is that it has a relatively high cost and each harness can only be used for one individual crew member.
Recently, a number of proposals have been made for providing an integrated, seat-mounted harness system. One such proposal incorporates a single quick disconnect fitting which accepts four separate strap connections. This arrangement facilitates quick egress, but the location of the single point connection and the routing of the straps are not ideal from the standpoint of crew member support and strap loading. In addition, the proposed system does not include a chest strap to prevent the seat occupant's shoulders from slipping out of the harness.
Parachute and/or restraint harnesses are disclosed in each of the following: U.S. Pat. No. 1,909,176, granted May 16, 1933, to E. L. Hoffman; No. 2,408,088, granted Sept. 24, 1946, to J. Miller et al.; No. 2,448,066, granted Aug. 31, 1948, to H. Wilson; No. 2,475,631, granted July 12, 1949, to J. Miller et al.; No. 2,643,836, granted June 30, 1953, to C. E. Carrol; No. 2,725,204, granted Nov. 29, 1955, to J. W. Horning; No. 2,986,362, granted May 30, 1961, to E. A. Gimalouski; No. 3,154,272, granted Oct. 27, 1964, to D. Gold; No. 3,559,932, granted Feb. 2, 1971, to M. N. Ternes; No. 3,692,262, granted Sept. 19, 1972, to J. A. Gaylord; No. 3,757,744, granted Sept. 11,, 1973, to M. H. Pravaz; No. 3,954,234, granted May 4, 1974, to R. H. Frost et al.; and No. 4,378,921, granted Apr. 5, 1983, to R. E. Allen et al. Such harnesses are also disclosed in German printed patent application No. 1,289,747, dated Feb. 20, 1969; and French printed patent application No. 75 19554, made public Jan. 21, 1977.
Ternes discloses a harness having what is described as "an integral arrangement of straps". The harness has a lap belt that extends across the front and is sewn onto the vertical straps. The lap belt attaches to the lap belt restraining system of the parachute. The harness does not have any strap that encircles the chest. Frost et al. disclose a harness that is attached to a survival kit that forms a part of the portion of the seat on which the seat occupant sits. The Frost et al. harness has a bib strap but no chest-encircling strap and no lap strap. The Allen et al. harness has a single fastening means and a separately formed lap belt. The harness has straps that surround the chest, but the center back portion of the chest-surrounding straps is formed by a separate strap so that the load path does not encircle the chest.
The above patents and the prior art that is discussed and/or cited therein should be studied for the purpose of putting the present invention into proper persepctive relative to the prior art.